And to think that I saw it on Mulberry Street

Dr. Seuss is not only an author of some of the most popular children's books of all time, but a household name that brings a smile to anyones face.

This New York Times article was written to honor the 75th anniversary of Dr. Seuss' first book, "And to think that I saw it on Mulberry Street."

It grabbed my attention right away simply because of the topic it covered. I mean, come on, who doesn't love a good Dr. Seuss book? However, I felt disappointed in the delivery of the story.

I felt that the story took too many directions and didn't have a flow that kept my eyes moving through the piece. If you agree, what would you all change to make the story flow better? What did you enjoy about the story? There were quite a few things that I thought were done very well.

Do you think that the journalist brought an interesting perspective to the story seeing as it is about such a beloved author and so many years later? If not, what would you have done differently?

Finally, does the fact that it is about Dr. Seuss and the 75th anniversary of the book Mulberry Street enough to make this story newsworthy?

Here's the link to the story:http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/30/education/dr-seuss-book-mulberry-street-turns-75.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=dr.seuss&st=cse

The Vanishing Mind: Life, With Dementia

This article grabbed my attention right away. It’s a quick read but covers a very serious issue for those affected by it.

The first paragraph started it off with the very personal story of a man stabbing a woman and then having troubles in prison. The reporter, Pam Belluck, then switched gears very quickly. Just in the second paragraph, she wrote, “Despite that, he has recently been entrusted with an extraordinary responsibility.” The nut graph appears in the fifth paragraph. Do you think Belluck introduced it in the best way possible? I think it was well done, but we all have our own favorite writing techniques, of course.

We talked last week about “jargony,” as Clay called it, a technique used to advance an issue. Do you think the reporter used that method for this story? Do you think this story has a broad appeal? Did it start off that way, or did the reporter introduce the newsworthiness later on?

It’s obviously important for reporters to provide a fair and balanced account of the issues they are reporting on. I think Belluck did a good job of leaving out her opinions and providing enough appropriate sources. Would you agree?

I recommend also watching the video after reading it!

Here's the link to the story:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/26/health/dealing-with-dementia-among-aging-criminals.html?hp

Go Directly, Digitally to Jail? Classic Toys Learn New Clicks

Everyone probably remembers their favorite toys and games as kids, whether it was Monopoly, Barbies or Life. I know at least for me personally, my friends and I often reminisce about old toys and talk about how toys these days just aren't the same. This article reminded me how true that statement is, as the author gives the reader an insight into brand new toys and games that are integrating technology into their products.

How do you think staring at a screen instead of playing with imagination will affect learning in younger children in years to come? Do you think that these technologically advanced toys will have a long shelf life, or will they pass once technology advances once again?

Also consider the newsworthiness of the piece and how it's written. Do you think the inverted pyramid style works for this type of piece? Is it well written, and if not, what could be done to improve this story?

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/26/business/barbie-monopoly-and-hot-wheels-for-ipad-generations.html?ref=technology

Who's Counting Anyway?

Last week in class we discussed making the most of our words and looked at the 300 word stories. We also looked at the two very long stories that covered the Zanesville animals. All of those stories were very different because of their length, but each were written with the purpose of describing in powerful detail. Which do readers really prefer? Does length really have that much of an impact on the readers? Does anyone like to sit down and read a six page story? Are we doing readers a favor by keeping them short and leaving out detail? I found this story on The New York Times website and I was instantly drawn into it because of how unique of a story it was. In this instance I liked all of the detail because there was so much involved in this story and I wanted to know everything. What do you guys think?

This Story is about 60 people involved in a large kidney transplant swap.

Here's the link : http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/health/lives-forever-linked-through-kidney-transplant-chain-124.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=health

Jeremy Lin coverage

I thought the story was very interesting.

I liked how it told the story of how the media took what was a ‘feel good’ story and over-hyped it, and how that turned into a racial debate. I know I talk about the media all the time and how they like to stretch stories until they can’t get anything outof them anymore and the danger with that. This story explained my theory in a way that everyone could understand.

I thought the story had a lot of detail andfully explained what was wrong with the story but it still was short enough tokeep a reader’s attention.

Here is the link: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/20/business/media/jeremy-lin-media-hype-stumbles-on-race.html?hp

(Clay posted this for Brett C., who was having technical difficulties).

The Deep-Seated Meaning Of The American Sofa

This article in NPR talks about the meaning of the American sofa. It starts off by talking about two sofas: one that New York Knicks Jeremy Lin had slept on before his rise to fame and the other belonged to Steve Jobs. Jobs wife told a biographer how they would often discuss the purpose of a sofa.

The article uses Lin and Jobs to introduce the topic, but goes on to examine the sofa further. It talks about the functions, meaning, and different styles of sofas. I know the one thing I miss while I'm at school is the comfortable couch in the family room at my house. This article proved an interesting read and brought up a few good questions.

I'm a sucker for headlines, and this one caught my eye. The article is relatively short and I enjoyed the conversational tone. Whether or not it is newsworthy is a whole other issue. Do you think this article is newsworthy? If it is newsworthy, what makes it newsworthy? Do you think this article is focused on a certain audience? What could the author have done to improve the story?


http://www.npr.org/2012/02/19/146981424/the-deep-seated-meaning-of-the-american-sofa

For Feb. 16 discussion: Revisiting Zanesville

All of us probably remember the surreal story that broke out in Zanesville, Ohio, last October. The escape and subsequent killing of dozens of exotic animals were international news items in the weeks that followed.

Two major U.S. magazines, GQ and Esquire, revisited that mayhem in this month's issues. The stories don't really break a whole lot of new ground. But they do paint fascinating pictures of the escape and its aftermath using what is commonly referred to as a "tick-tock" story format - an hour-by-hour (or in some cases minute-by-minute) narrative account that includes incredible detail and context (almost in the form of play-by-play) from the important actors.

Reading the two stories back to back is an interesting exercise. We have two talented reporters writing for major media outlets, both of whom enjoy large budgets and virtually unlimited space. The final products are similar in many respects, but different in others.

Compare and, more importantly, contrast the two stories. What made them different, and how did those differences affect your enjoyment of the articles? Give some specific examples of what you liked (and perhaps what you didn't like). I'll share my opinions Thursday, but here's a preview: I find one of these stories above average. I find the other breathtakingly good.

Here are the links to the stories:

GQ

Esquire

For Feb. 16 discussion: What can you say in 300 words?

Sometimes, you can say an awful lot.

Case-in-point: Brady Dennis, former night cops reporter for the St. Petersburg (Florida) Times.

Dennis, who is now with the Washington Post, decided he wanted to highlight some people who never found their way into the newspaper. So he and photographer Chris Zuppa began a monthly series called “300 Words,” in which they set out to tell the stories of toll booth operators, dads in jail, rodeo clowns and others. The series won national acclaim.

In a 2006 interview, Dennis said he wanted to take on the project because “I believe that each person not only has a story to tell, but that each person has a story that matters. I’ve always felt humbled in the presence of everyday, ‘ordinary’ people who are willing to share their lives with us.”

Later in the same interview, he discussed how the series – specifically the rigid word limit – made him a better journalist (read on after the jump):

Today's Youth Are Not As Troubled As Perceived

This article discusses the misconception that today's youth is one of the most troubled in history. According to most adults, our generation has become more and more rebellious and liberal than ever before. However, you'll be surprised to find out, it's actually the opposite.

I was actually very surprised to see the statistics this survey brought up. I also thought of our generation as being more defiant than those before us; more underage drinking, premarital sex, and drug use, when in fact, these things have declined over the last 30 years.

The article points out that the media is responsible for a lot of the misconception with TV shows such as "Teen Mom" and "Gossip Girl". Why do you think the media portrays our generation in such a negative light? Were you also surprised to see these statistics? Why do you think our generation is becoming more conservative?

Here's the link to the article: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/02/02/the-kids-are-more-than-all-right/?ref=health.

McDonald's Stops Using "pink slime" in its Products

Well, we Amercicans love fast food, but do we really know what goes into the food that we eat at these quick restaurants? I sure didn't.

After reading this article about McDonald's, I was mortified. The picture at the beginning was enough to make me cringe. If you are brave, watch the video of celebrity chef, Jamie Oliver. It will give you a whole new perpective on fast food meat.

According to this article, McDonald's has stated that the restaurant will stop using ammonium hydroxide in its hamburger meat. Ammonium hydroxide is a chemical that is used to clean households and is also used as fertliziers. The article also states that if certain acids are added to ammonium hydroxide, it will turn into ammonium nitrate, which is used to make homeade bombs. I'm glad I'm eating that whenever I go to McDonald's...

I found this story newsworthy, because fast food is pretty much a staple in most people's lives. People eat fast food daily and if there are certain chemicals going into the food that they eat, it's a good idea to know about it.

I think this story did a good job following the inverted pyramid style, and the paragraph lengths were decent. There were also some pretty good quotes. What did you think of the story? If you were the writer, was there anything you would change or add? Do you still want to eat at McDonald's? Perhaps this article will make you think twice about ordering a hamburger there.

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/31/10282876-mcdonalds-drops-use-of-gooey-ammonia-based-pink-slime-in-hamburger-meat